Daily Recap — June 26

“Good gravy there’s a buttload of news.”

— Trey Vaught

.

.

.

.

A WIN FOR THE GOOD GUYS

.

.

You can file this under “I told you so.”

In a much-narrower-than-it-should’ve-been decision, the Supreme Court has upheld the constitutional right of the POTUS to prevent potentially dangerous individuals from entering the country. If this sounds like a pretty easy case to decide, it’s because it is. But this is 2018, where progressive feelings are often considered to be on equal footing with objective law. It’s a theater of the absurd, to be sure, but thankfully wasn’t the case today.

Let’s do this thing RNR-style and go point to point on everything you need to know about today’s ruling.

.

.

1) So remind me, what exactly does this do again?

.

It’s important to explain exactly what was just ruled upon, since there have been multiple variations of the so-called “travel ban.”

PDT issued his first travel ban in January 2017. That 90-day ban on travelers from Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen, and a 120-day ban on refugees worldwide, was soon struck down by federal district and appeals courts. A second version issued in March dropped Iraq and exempted visa- and green card-holders. It was also struck down, although the Supreme Court would rule that travelers without close ties to the USA could be barred while vetting procedures were reviewed.

That brings us to today.

In an opinion written by Chief Justice John Roberts, the SCOTUS ruled for the government in Trump v. Hawaii, the lawsuit over the current version of the travel ban — the third that the Trump administration has issued since it made its first effort in January 2017.

Roberts reversed the ruling of the ultra-liberal 9th Circuit Court that had attempted to put the travel ban on hold — a ruling that the SCOTUS had already kept from going into effect while it reviewed the case — and sent the case back to the 9th Circuit to reconsider.

The current version, the one that just passed, prevents some (or all) immigrants, refugees, and visa holders from Iran, Libya, North Korea, Somalia, Syria, Venezuela, and Yemen from entering our country. It has actually been in full effect since early December 2017 thanks to an earlier Supreme Court ruling that lifted the injunction put in place by Obama lap-dog Derrick Watson, who made this absurd ruling from his federal bench in Hawaii.

Basically, it means that if a country is known to be a hotbed of terrorism and/or other threats to our homeland, and their vetting system is insufficient to guarantee the safety of our citizens, they’re not getting on that plane, Jack. The fact that this is even a controversial policy is mind-numbing. IT’S COMMON ****ING SENSE. WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG WITH THE LEFT? WHY DID THIS TAKE A SUPREME COURT DECISION TO IMPLEMENT??

The existing ban is much narrower than Trump’s first attempts. Due in part to early court defeats in 2017, it only applies to certain categories of visa applicants (depending on country) and theoretically allows for would-be immigrants to apply for waivers.

So it’s nowhere close to being an actual “Muslim ban,” but it is designed to be permanent.

And that’s one hell of a victory for our national security;

.

.

2) But seriously though, is it really permanent?

.

In theory, the legal fight over the travel ban isn’t over, since the SCOTUS is still instructing the 9th Circuit to rule on the merits of the ban. But by decreeing that the legal challenges to the ban aren’t “likely to succeed” on the merits, the court has just made it extremely difficult for the ban to get struck down in future.

Legally, the court’s decision rested on two conclusions.

.

First of all, it found that indefinitely banning people from particular countries was a lawful use of the president’s power under the Immigration and Nationality Act, which allows the executive branch to suspend the entry of a “class” of people if the government “finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States.”

“The language of §1182(f) is clear,” Chief Justice Roberts wrote, “and the Proclamation does not exceed any textual limit on the President’s authority.”

BOOM. Take that.

Hawaii and the other states challenging the ban argued that because another line in the same section of the law prevents the government from discriminating in immigration policy based on nationality, it wasn’t legal to use the suspension provision against whole countries’ worth of entrants. Except the ban doesn’t discriminate on the basis of nationality, but rather a nation’s status with terrorism and its ability to vet those within its borders. Nice try, losers.

Second of all, the court found that the travel ban did not violate the First Amendment by denying freedom of religion to Muslims. In other words, as I noted above, it found that the travel ban was not, in fact, a Muslim ban.

Much of the open borders crowd’s argument hinged on statements PDT made one the campaign trail regarding banning Muslims. The central question over the 17 months of litigation over various iterations of the travel ban has been about whether Trump’s December 2015 campaign promise of a “total and complete shutdown of Muslims” entering the United States (which would actually be unconstitutional) is still at the heart of the travel ban. But because he didn’t make that statement as president, the administration argued, it shouldn’t count against him.

And there’s the pesky little fact that executive action doesn’t actually ban Muslims. That’s sort of a critical piece of this whole debate.

BOTTOM LINE: Yes, the 9th Circuit has the freedom to further challenge the merits of the ban if it so chooses, but the SCOTUS has already ruled against every argument it has to do so.

So technically they can fight it, but for all intents and purposes. this baby is done.

.

.

3) If you needed anymore reason to get politically involved….

.

Elections matter, people. Like, a lot.

.

The vote to uphold the travel ban was 5-4 — straight along party lines. If Shillary Clinton beats PDT on November 8, 2016 — a fate we avoided by the narrowest of margins — there’s no way that the vacancy caused by the death of Antonin Scalia is filled by Neil Gorsuch. It would almost certainly be filled instead by someone more likely to side with Ruth Hater Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor rather than Sam Alito and the great Clarence Thomas. And while it’s impossible to believe a Hillzdawg White House (God, the very idea gives me chills) would have proposed a travel ban anything close to what PDT did, even if she did, the court would have almost certainly killed it.

.

But wait — there’s more!

.

Republicans may not yet be done reaping the judicial consequences of Trump’s 2016 victory. Rumors are rampant that Justice Anthony “Who knows how the hell I’ll vote” Kennedy may well retire at the end of this term, which comes to a close this week. While Kennedy voted in favor of upholding the travel ban — and was appointed to the court by Ronald Reagan — he’s a wildcard on the bench at best. He often serves as the tie-breaking vote on cases, and did so in this one as well. His retirement would afford PDT an opportunity to appoint a more reliable conservative and, in so doing, impact the ideological makeup of the court for decades to come.

.

And with Barry’s appointees proving today that they will vote along leftist ideological lines even when the law couldn’t be clearer, SCOTUS vacancies are important as ever.

.

I don’t wish ill will upon anyone, but I do wish a couple of those old liberal justices would happen upon a retirement community that catches their eye.

.

.

.

.

4) Yes, Turtle McConnell deserves some credit here.

.

Like all of you, I find it extremely difficult to give Turtle McConnell credit for anything whatsoever, seeing as how he’s presided over one of if not the most spineless GOP Senates in U.S. history.

However, one can’t underestimate the role McConnell played in today’s decision. Turtle, you’ll remember, refused to hold confirmation hearings for Merrick Garland, the judge then-President Barry Soetoro put forward as Scalia’s replacement. McConnell argued that Scalia’s death in February was too close to the November election for Barry, an outgoing lame duck president, to be allowed to make the call on who would fill the seat.

“The next justice could fundamentally alter the direction of the Supreme Court and have a profound impact on our country,” explained McConnell at the time.

Country to what our friends on the Left may scream, Turtle’s decision is not without precedent. In fact, the “no appointments under lame ducks” rule is the brainchild of one Creepy Joe Biden. It’s even known as the “Biden rule.” Dims only appreciate rules when they stand to benefit from them.

And since they weren’t the beneficiaries of this particular self-made rule, coochie caps went absolutely crazy. But McConnell, to his credit, refused to budge. Then Obama joined the commie chorus in castigating him and yet, still, McConnell wouldn’t give an inch. And in the end, the reality of how the confirmation process works made it impossible for McConnell’s decision to be overturned. Today’s court decision validated Turtle’s strategy.

And to top it all off, Turtle tried his hand once again at trolling the Left, as his campaign arm tweeted out this photo of himself and Gorsuch shortly after the opinion was announced:

Look, folks, love him or hate him, credit should go where it’s due. And Turtle earned it this go-round.

.

.

.

.

.

BIG PICTURE:

.

The Cooch Coalition can spin this however they like, but this is a huge victory for the Trump administration. More importantly, it’s a victory for our country.

The very notion that we had to fight all the way to the SCOTUS just to get thorough vetting for people entering our country from terrorist hotbeds is an insult to the American people. PDT’s primary job as POTUS will always be to safeguard the American people, and this #ExtremeVetting policy works precisely toward that end.

This particular ruling has implications beyond this executive order, though. It reaffirms what should have never needed reaffirmation in the first place; the broad constitutional authority afforded the POTUS by the Constitution in terms of immigration.

Mr. President, don’t be shy to pull the trigger on that authority in the future. You now have legal precedent on your side. Continue to keep us safe, Sir.

And remember, national security often starts at our southern border.

Run with that idea however you like.

.

.

.

.

.

.

LET’S STAY ON THE SCOTUS TRAIN

.

.

Man, the Judicial branch was good to conservatives today.

The SCOTUS dealt a blow to a California law that requires anti-abortion clinics to post information about where women can obtain cheap abortions and contraception from the state.

In another narrow 5-4 ruling (go vote, people!), the court said that the notices for licensed facilities likely violates the First Amendment and notices for unlicensed facilities unduly burdens protected speech.

This decision was a big win for faith-based clinics, known as “crisis pregnancy centers,” which had argued the requirements under the state’s Reproductive Freedom, Accountability, Comprehensive Care and Transparency Act, or FACT Act, infringed on their speech rights, forcing them to promote a procedure they morally oppose.

“No one should be forced by the government to express a message that violates their convictions, especially on deeply divisive subjects such as abortion,” said Alliance Defending Freedom President, CEO, and General Counsel Michael Farris, who argued on behalf of the National Institute of Family and Life Advocates before the SCOTUS.

“In this case, the government used its power to force pro-life pregnancy centers to provide free advertising for abortion. The Supreme Court said that the government can’t do that, and that it must respect pro-life beliefs.”

The law applies to any facilities in California that provide family planning and pregnancy-related services, such as ultrasounds and pregnancy tests.

Unlicensed facilities, meanwhile, are required to post disclaimers on site and in print and digital ads that they are not a licensed medical provider. Those disclaimers must be posted both in English and in the county’s primary languages, because we don’t have the courage to demand that all business be conducted in English in our country.

.

BOTTOM LINE:

.

Cases don’t get any simpler than this.

The godless state legislature of California believes that faith-based prenatal care centers should be forced to provide information on where to get abortions (as if that information isn’t readily available anywhere else in 2018).

Now imagine for a moment that a Planned Parenthood clinic was being forced by law to post scripture about the sanctity of life; about how God knew us before we were born down to the hairs on our head. And on top of that, were forced to give our directions to the closest places of worship.

How do you think that law would go over? We all know the answer to that.

Good job, SCOTUS.

.

.

.

.

.

.

AUNTIE MAXINE CROSSES THE LINE

.

.

Maxine Waters will never be accused of possessing a towering intellect. She’s known more for mindlessly parroting calls to “IN-PEACH” the president, whatever that means. Up to today, only the stupidest, most fringe leftists have ever given her soapbox screams the time of day. But now, things have changed. This time, she’s taken things to a whole other level.

Waters, who once nearly drove herself to madness after being ordered to sit in the corner in a round room, said at a rally over the weekend that those who oppose Trump’s policies should confront his Cabinet members wherever they encounter them.

“If you see anybody from that Cabinet in a restaurant, in a department store, at a gasoline station, you get out and you create a crowd and you push back on them and you tell them they’re not welcome anymore, anywhere,” Waters said to her constituency in the cesspool of Los Angeles.

Her comments were a response to the controversies over the weekend in which a restaurant owner in Virginia refused to serve Sarah Huckabee Sanders and protesters ran DHS Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen out of a Mexican restaurant in D.C.

Waters defended her remarks not in her usual crayon-drawn declarations, but in multiple media interviews and again to House Democratic colleagues during a private caucus meeting this morning. According to lawmakers in the room, Waters said she has a right to express herself under the First Amendment and that she “does not support or condone violence.”

.

This led Speaker Paul Rino to pretend to have testicles for a moment and call out Auntie Maxine for her bats*** crazy rhetoric and demand that she apologize for urging supporters to “confront” and “harass” top Trump officials in restaurants and other public places.

“There is no place for this. She obviously should apologize,” Rino told reporters at the Capitol.

“When we, in this democracy, are suggesting that because we disagree with each other’s political views and policy views and philosophical views, that we should resort to violence and harassment and intimidation, that’s dangerous for our society, that’s dangerous for our democracy,” Rino continued. “She should apologize and there is just no place for that in our public discourse.”

PDT, though, as usual, had a much more gratifying, accurate and politically shrewd response:

“Congresswoman Maxine Waters, an extraordinarily low IQ person, has become, together with [Botox] Nancy Pelosi, the Face of the Democrat Party. She has just called for harm to supporters, of which there are many, of the Make America Great Again movement,” Trump tweeted. “Be careful what you wish for Max!”

HELL. FRIGGIN. YEAH.

.

BOTTOM LINE:

.

That response from PDT pretty much covered it.

The disparity in responses between Paul Rino and PDT is a terrific microcosm of the entire problem here. The RINO establishment are utterly spineless and thus useless against the depraved tactics of the Left. Calls for civility are wonderful and, God know, we all want civility to win the day.

But for the love of all things holy, PLEASE WAKE UP AND REALIZE THAT THESE PEOPLE AREN’T KIDDING.

They are fascists in every sense of the word. On their view, there is no other valid position other than the Marxist ones they continue to shove down everyone’s throats. It wasn’t Trump supporters showing up at Hillary and/or Bernie’s rallies inciting violence. It’s not conservatives blocking the entrances to buildings. The fact is, Trumpers have put up with a lot of BS and we’re reaching a point to where that dog will no longer hunt.

PDT was damned right when he told Maxine to be careful what she wishes for. It’s Trump supporters who know their way around a rifle, and many of us are pretty damn good shots. In fact, many of us are veterans who have seen a lot worse than these commies have to dish out.

And even those Trumpers who didn’t serve have an appreciation for it and know their way around a rifle better than many active duty service members. The thread that connects us all is our love of country and our willingness to defend her.

These idiots need to understand that we’re done playing around and, while we may not be “high level cabinet members,” we are damn sure high level supporters who voted for PDT to save this country.

Be careful what you wish for indeed, Auntie Maxine. Bashing Trump may be a national pastime for you and your sheeple, but defending out beautiful country against the filthy Marxists you’re attempting to incite is a much more ingrained tradition than you could possibly understand.

It’s in our DNA, and some folks on the Left are poised to learn that lesson the hardest way possible.

.

.

.

.

.

.

HOLY CRAP, LEAKIN’ JAMES

.

.

As my readers know, I often hold off on reporting even bombshell stories until I feel that all the most important facts are in. The legacy media tend to leave a lot to be desired in terms of analysis and/or relevant facts. More often than not, they simply don’t know what questions to ask.

Those issues are present with this story as well, and thus I cannot guarantee my readers that I’m giving the whole truth here. In fact, no one knows the whole truth at this point so any proclamation of such would be intellectually dishonest at best and outright lying at worst.

That being said, the sheer enormity of this story demands that it be brought to light, even if all the facts have yet to be revealed. Let’s dig into what we know.

This is a breaking news story, and it is shocking to say the least. It was broken by The Hill’s contributor, John Solomon.

In March of 2017, a ‘behind the scenes’ deal to negotiate with Julian Assange was in the works. It was essentially brokered to persuade Assange to the redaction of agency personnel in hostile jurisdictions and foreign espionage risks to WikiLeaks staff.

This was when Wikileaks was ready to irresponsibly publish “Vault 7” in its entirety. The vault is a collection of tools used by U.S. Intelligence Community to spy on foreign intelligence services and their allies.

It’s like this: Assange had the “keys to the kingdom” so to speak” in terms of our hacking ability, so the U.S. was negotiating a way to get him not to release the stuff that endangered people’s lives in exchange for protection.

.

Those involved in this sage were Leakin’ James Comey, Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA), DOJ official Bruce Ohr (the Asian dude who served as a go-between for the pee-pee dossier), and Julian Assange. American attorney, Adam Waldman, was, also a key figure throughout the failed attempt at the deal between Assange and the U.S. intel community.

Now read this next part because it YUUUUUUUGGEEE:

Assange offered to discuss technical evidence ruling out certain parties in the controversial leak of Dim Party emails to WikiLeaks during the 2016 election. The U.S. government believes those emails were hacked by Russia; Assange insists they did not come from Moscow.

Yes, you read that right, Assange was willing to give technical evidence to this team of U.S. officials that Russia did not hack the DNC. If you’re one of those who believe Seth Rich to have been the leaker, this would have been our chance to find out for sure. If reports are to be believed, Assange was ready to hand over the goods just to get out of that damn Ecuadorian embassy in London for a while, and part of those “goods” was the truth about the DNC hacking.

Pretty juicy stuff, eh?

That means the whole PutinGate narrative would be put to the test. Comey, Clapper, Brennan, all of them were on the chopping block, since their adherence to the OMG RUSSIA narrative has been the main defense of their shady actions leading up to the election.

In saying that, the fake Russia collusion story would be exposed for what it was, and not only that, James Comey would be exposed for his role in creating it – not to mention the rest of the players like John Brennan, James Clapper, and the whole gang.

.

So, in the spring of 2017, one of Assange’s lawyers Adam Waldman negotiated with the DOJ on a possible deal to get the WikiLeaks founder limited immunity and safe passage out of a London embassy to talk with U.S. officials.

In return, Assange would provide technical information to the U.S. ruling out certain suspects in the release of hacked DNC emails key to the Russia case, identify vulnerabilities in the CIA’s computer systems and talk about measures to protect certain sensitive information in future releases by Wikileaks.

The outlines of the deal were memorialized in a March 28, 2017 email between Waldman and Justice Department counterintelligence section chief David Laufman.

Here is the text of that email:

“Subject to adequate and binding protections, including but not limited to an acceptable immunity and safe passage agreement, Mr. Assange welcomes the opportunity to discuss with the U.S. government risk mitigation approaches relating to CIA documents in WikiLeaks’ possession or control, such as the redaction of agency personnel in hostile jurisdictions and foreign espionage risks to WikiLeaks staff,” Waldman wrote Laufman on March 28, 2017.

“Derived directly from this discussion of risk mitigation, Mr. Assange is also prepared to discuss (within the source protection boundaries expected of a journalist and publisher operating at the highest level of integrity) (i) a description of CIA information in the possession or control of WikiLeaks; (ii) the risks of third parties who may have obtained access to such information (not withstanding the foregoing, for the avoidance of doubt this category specifically and others generally will not include any information that may affect WikiLeaks obligations to protect its sources) and (iii) information regarding the timing of further publications in so far as they relate to the risk mitigation approaches developed.”

So as we’ve just read, the U.S. had the opportunity to view evidence regarding who actually hacked the DNC. Now why in the world would anyone want to stop this?

Get ready for the humdinger.

There are reports surfacing — by the highly respected John Solomon of all people — that James Comey told Sen. Warner to ‘stand down’ on the deal with Assange. In response, and to his great dishonor, Assange unleashed a series of leaks that damaged our cyber warfare capabilities for a long time to come.

.

BIG PICTURE:

.

Folks, there is a boatload of questions that need answers here.

As you can plainly tell, and to the detriment of my standing within the Trump community, I am not a Julian Assange fanboy. As someone who actually understands why information is classified most of the time, I find many of his actions to be reckless, irresponsible and with a malicious intent to harm America; a country he’s sought to undermine for the majority of his adult life.

HOWEVER….

That doesn’t mean he wasn’t in possession of very valuable information, and not just info that hurts out cyber warfare arsenal. If these reports are true — and I find John Solomon to be a solid reporter — then what James Comey did has the strong appearance of being nothing less than an intervention designed to protect the government — specifically the FBI’s — rear end.

What was Comey so afraid of being found, to the point of sinking a negotiation that would safeguard our most valuabe spy tools?

And what’s worse is valuable information for our enemies was released in the process. Of course, Assange is ultimately responsible for that, but there was a negotiation in place to prevent it and Comey seems to have thrown a wrench in the entire process.

Something stinks here, big time. Assange, if he’s the hero that he’s been exalted as by so many, will release the information on the DNC hacking so that everyone can know the truth. He’s all about transparency and speaking truth to power, right?

But in the meantime, Congress, WHY IS A SUBPOENA NOT BEING DRAWN UP FOR JAMES COMEY AS WE SPEAK?

We’ve got far too many questions and far too few answers.

That needs to change, yesterday.

.

.

.

.

.

.

ANOTHER DAY, ANOTHER DEADLINE

.

.

Another deadline missed, I should say. ‘

For over a year, Rep. Devin Nunes has demanded the DOJ to reveal when they began spying on the Trump campaign. And like always, he’s been stonewalled at every turn.

The latest demand came in a letter delivered to the DOJ this past Sunday night, wherein Nunes gave the bureau until 5pm Monday, June 25 to hand over documentation on how the spying began. And welp, just like always, that deadline has passed and nothing, zilch, nada. The outlook for the future isn’t looking too good, either.

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes (R-CA), along with other congressional lawmakers, are not expecting Department of Justice Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein to comply with the Monday deadline to turn over documents related to the FBI’s investigation into its handling of the Russia investigation. According to sources who spoke with this reporter, the failure to comply with the request could lead to the threat of contempt or impeachment procedures by lawmakers.

Specifically, the lawmakers want to know if the DOJ and FBI used informants to spy on the Trump campaign, how many were used, and if they were used, how much it cost the taxpayers.

“You have unilaterally restricted access to these materials to the ‘Gang Of Eight,’” Nunes wrote in the letter. “As the committee has repeatedly stated, this is unacceptable.”

Nunes demanded answers to several questions in his letter to Rosenstein:

Who- you or Director Wray – is responsible for compliance with the Committee’s subpoenas and requests that have been issued to the DOJ, including the FBI?

Did the FBI use informants against members or associates of the Trump campaign and if so, how many informants were used and how much money was spent on their activities?

According to Sara Carter, the House Freedom Caucus has already drawn up the paperwork necessary to start impeachment proceedings on Rosenstein.

.

Last week, the FBI gave Congress thousands of requested documents on the Russia probe, including details on its use of spies and FISA abuse during the 2016 presidential campaign.

But, Freedom Caucus Chairman Mark Meadows (R-NC) says the FBI only gave a fraction of what was requested, and he’s less than thrilled.

“If they don’t comply with the resolution they know the remedies the House has, contempt and impeachment,” said Jordan. “If we don’t get that information entitled to us, everybody knows that we’ll do what we have to do to get it done.”

Jim Jordan and Mark Meadows authored the resolution demanding the documentation along with their accompanying threats of impeachment. Nunes is also threatening to hold Rosenstein in contempt or impeachment if they are not produced.

.

.

.

BIG PICTURE:

.

It’s the same old, same old in terms of the DOJ and FBI stonewalling Nunes and his committee on documents. It’s pretty obvious that there is much to hide. And with the incredibly worrisome news regarding Comey’s possible intervention with Assange, things just got 10000x more interesting.

There are a couple pieces of good news here, though.

First, Sara Carter is very well plugged-in to the Hill, so when she ways the Freedom Caucus is preparing paperwork to impeach Rosenstein, I believe her. Not to mention, Meadows, Nunes and co. can only be humiliated so much before they start to bring out the fangs.

Secondly, Fraud Rosenstein and J. Edgar Wray will publicly testify before the House Judiciary Committee Thursday, June 28th at 1:00 PM EST. Those hearing will be broadcast live and I’ll be sure to have a link up in TTC.

Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-VA), Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, also issued rabid NeverTrump PutinGate investigator Peter Strzok a subpoena to appear before the Committee tomorrow for a deposition, but it appears that one will be closed to the public. ARGH.

With all that’s been revealed over the last 2 years, one would think that this saga would soon be at an end. However, the facts suggest anything but.

You may not want to hear this, folks, but we’re just getting started.

Keep your eyes open and your thinking caps on. We’re going to dissect this bad boy as it unravels.

Cheers!

.

.

.

There it is, homeskillet. You know the drill: questions, comments, concerns, memes, insults, compliments, stickers, jokes, emojis and, if we have time, complaints.

Donations

Hi everyone, if you enjoyed this article and feel that I’ve earned a tip, I would greatly appreciate any help you can give. If you would like to give more than $3, simply change the number in the box to multiply the donation. If not, I still love you and keep up the good fight!

$3.00

Donations

If you enjoyed this piece and would like to support my work, I would very much appreciate any kind of support you can give. If not, I still love ya and please keep up the fight! I’m unable to post anything but a set dollar amount at this time, but if you have a different amount in mind, my PayPal address is: dafifflike@gmail.com. Thank you so much for visiting my site and I hope you return!

$5.00

Donations

Hi everyone, if you enjoyed this article and feel that I’ve earned a tip, I would greatly appreciate any help you can give. If you would like to give more than $1, simply change the number in the box to multiply the donation. If not, I still love you and keep up the good fight!

1 thought on “Daily Recap — June 26”

The minute Maxine “underwater” opens her mouth, the corruption of the DNC smacks headstrong into the stench of obama & his bag of shit-stirrer’s. That is the absolute depth of what I can deal with in this excellently crafted recap. Thank you Trey—- it isn’t your words that elevate my BP, rather, it is my age— I have gone thru the SLA— & Patty Hearst, the Back Panthers & Angela Davis all on CA soil—Just too much blackened soil. You do a great job writing the newscap—